Details about how process scheduler works?
in [Unix Programming]
|
From: Peter Olcott on 14 Apr 2010 16:00 "Trevor Hemsley" <Trevor.Hemsley(a)mytrousers.ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:gjxI70UYBlcC-pn2-zundi7XJ6DoM(a)trevor2.dsl.pipex.com... > On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 13:30:07 UTC in > comp.os.linux.development.system, "Peter > Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > >> The hardware will be a single PENTIUM 4 computer with 2.0 >> GB >> RAM, this design constraint is immutable for the >> foreseeable >> future. > > Did this thread start on April 1st? > > -- > Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK > Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com My ISP provides these for $56 per month including UPS and lots of bandwidth and 2.0 GB RAM.
From: Peter Olcott on 14 Apr 2010 16:04 "Keith Thompson" <kst-u(a)mib.org> wrote in message news:lnpr21q3rc.fsf(a)nuthaus.mib.org... > "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >> "Ian Collins" <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... >>> On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>>> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >>>> Outlook >>>> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but >>>> the >>>> fix >>>> did not work. >>> >>> So junk it and use a decent client! >> >> I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of >> crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be >> exported. > > How does that prevent you from using a decent client for > posting > to Usenet? There's no rule that says you have to throw > away Outlook > Express when you start using some other piece of software, > or that > you have to use the same client for e-mail and Usenet. > > Or when you post a followup you can copy the initial > article > into a decent text editor, compose it there (adding proper > "> " > prefixes and so forth if necessary), and the copy it back > to OE. > Yes, it's some extra work, and no, ideally you shouldn't > have to > do it, but the alternative is to continue posting as you > have been > and imposing that cost on the rest of us. Exactly what cost is imposed on anyone else here? I have to do this sort of manual stuff only for a few of David Schwartz's posts because his posts shut my quoting off. What other issues could anyone else have? I can't see any impact from my end. I also have many years worth of newsgroup posts archived in outlook express. > > -- > Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u(a)mib.org > <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> > Nokia > "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we > must do this." > -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
From: Ian Collins on 14 Apr 2010 17:03 On 04/15/10 08:04 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: > "Keith Thompson"<kst-u(a)mib.org> wrote in message > news:lnpr21q3rc.fsf(a)nuthaus.mib.org... >> "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >>> "Ian Collins"<ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... >>>> On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>>>> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >>>>> Outlook >>>>> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but >>>>> the >>>>> fix >>>>> did not work. >>>> >>>> So junk it and use a decent client! >>> >>> I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of >>> crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be >>> exported. >> >> How does that prevent you from using a decent client for >> posting >> to Usenet? There's no rule that says you have to throw >> away Outlook >> Express when you start using some other piece of software, >> or that >> you have to use the same client for e-mail and Usenet. >> >> Or when you post a followup you can copy the initial >> article >> into a decent text editor, compose it there (adding proper >> "> " >> prefixes and so forth if necessary), and the copy it back >> to OE. >> Yes, it's some extra work, and no, ideally you shouldn't >> have to >> do it, but the alternative is to continue posting as you >> have been >> and imposing that cost on the rest of us. > > Exactly what cost is imposed on anyone else here? Read the truncated mess you have just posted! No client worth using mucks up lines like that. > I have to do this sort of manual stuff only for a few of > David Schwartz's posts because his posts shut my quoting > off. What other issues could anyone else have? I can't see > any impact from my end. No they don't, his posts are fine and don't cause trouble for anyone else. -- Ian Collins
From: Peter Olcott on 14 Apr 2010 17:11 "Ian Collins" <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:82moteF126U7(a)mid.individual.net... > On 04/15/10 08:04 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >> "Keith Thompson"<kst-u(a)mib.org> wrote in message >> news:lnpr21q3rc.fsf(a)nuthaus.mib.org... >>> "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >>>> "Ian Collins"<ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>>>>> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >>>>>> Outlook >>>>>> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but >>>>>> the >>>>>> fix >>>>>> did not work. >>>>> >>>>> So junk it and use a decent client! >>>> >>>> I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of >>>> crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be >>>> exported. >>> >>> How does that prevent you from using a decent client for >>> posting >>> to Usenet? There's no rule that says you have to throw >>> away Outlook >>> Express when you start using some other piece of >>> software, >>> or that >>> you have to use the same client for e-mail and Usenet. >>> >>> Or when you post a followup you can copy the initial >>> article >>> into a decent text editor, compose it there (adding >>> proper >>> "> " >>> prefixes and so forth if necessary), and the copy it >>> back >>> to OE. >>> Yes, it's some extra work, and no, ideally you shouldn't >>> have to >>> do it, but the alternative is to continue posting as you >>> have been >>> and imposing that cost on the rest of us. >> >> Exactly what cost is imposed on anyone else here? > > Read the truncated mess you have just posted! No client > worth using mucks up lines like that. So how does Thunderbird (or whatever you use) do it? > >> I have to do this sort of manual stuff only for a few of >> David Schwartz's posts because his posts shut my quoting >> off. What other issues could anyone else have? I can't >> see >> any impact from my end. > > No they don't, his posts are fine and don't cause trouble > for anyone else. > > -- > Ian Collins
From: Ian Collins on 14 Apr 2010 17:27
On 04/15/10 06:37 AM, Keith Thompson wrote: > "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >> "Ian Collins"<ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... >>> On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>>> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >>>> Outlook >>>> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but the >>>> fix >>>> did not work. >>> >>> So junk it and use a decent client! >> >> I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of >> crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be exported. > > How does that prevent you from using a decent client for posting > to Usenet? There's no rule that says you have to throw away Outlook > Express when you start using some other piece of software, or that > you have to use the same client for e-mail and Usenet. > > Or when you post a followup you can copy the initial article > into a decent text editor, compose it there (adding proper "> " > prefixes and so forth if necessary), and the copy it back to OE. > Yes, it's some extra work, and no, ideally you shouldn't have to > do it, but the alternative is to continue posting as you have been > and imposing that cost on the rest of us. This is how Keith's message should be quoted. -- Ian Collins |